<p>The real question SHOULD be: “What are good ECs for human beings”.</p>
<p>And I’d take that one step further, What is the purpose of ANY EC? </p>
<p>I would hope that ultimately, anyone involved in volunteering or sports or music or tinkering with Legos or gardening or knitting or student government or (fill in the blank) is doing so because it is personally interesting (regardless of what anyone else thinks of it) and personally fulfilling.</p>
<p>I think a bit of parental pushing is standard, and probably necessary, at the beginning of any activity that takes thought and perserverance and planning. While a kid who sees herself as a future rock star will spend hours practicing a guitar on her own, if the interest holds beyond learning 4 chords, she’s going to need some guidance and parental help to find a guitar teacher, give rides to the weekly lessons, and later, to help find a way to maybe use those guitar skills to “give back”. Play at a local coffee house for tips to donate to the “Save the Music” foundation? Find a way to raise money and collect used musical instruments for the public schools whose music programs are being slashed? Petition to save the local music programs? Those are natural extensions of learning to play a guitar. </p>
<p>And that “giving back” part… I would hope that you help your kids to do it because it is the right, moral, ethical thing to do. I would hope that it is something you’d like your child to do because it is passing along a value that you think is important, and NOT because it might look good on a college application. But that’s just my opinion.</p>
This is the most rediculous thing I have ever heard. I had a long reply, which probably isn’t fit to be printed on this forum. I don’t want to go down the road of making assumptions of what kind of background someone must have to make that kind of statement.</p>
<p>Oh PLEASE…ECs absolutely should be things the student wants to pursue. IndianParent, your perspective is “off”. I’ve never read that the above ECs were “looked down upon on CC”…and what difference would it make anyway? </p>
<p>The only thing I WILL say about ECs for ANY college wannabee…don’t expect your ECs to trump less than stellar grades for the school(s)s to which you are applying. Unless you are a nobel prize winner or an olympic athlete, your ECs are just that…ECs. Pick things you ENJOY doing…oh…and IndianParent…the STUDENT should really be choosing the ECs, and not to package themselves for college…but because they WANT to do those ECs.</p>
This should be the quote for this thread. I love reading some chance threads - low GPA, but great ECs, what´s my chance of getting into Princeton? </p>
<p>I have never liked the smell of hospital, if someone were to tell me that by volunteering in a hospital could get me into HYPS, I would still not do it. My sister, on the other hand, enjoyed volunteering in a hospital. She used to go there very early in the morning (6am) to draw blood from patients. She was admitted to Yale and Darmouth though, maybe it was due to her volunteer work, but she was the Val for her class also.</p>
<p>Resume padding is not necessary. But figuring out how to present yourself is - not at every school, but certainly at the top 20 or so. They can take anyone, so why should they take YOU? My older son’s application said “I am a computer geek, take me or leave me,” but he said it in a fairly clever way that showed his self-deprecating humor. He had a nice list of activities that complimented his essay, but still made it clear he was a computer geek. While not a leader in the classic sense, he showed himself to be self-directed and willing to go the extra mile to teach himself what he wanted to know when no school in the area offered it.</p>
<p>Many schools offer exposure to music and community service early on. And different things appeal to different folks. Exposure is quite diffeent from “pushing” something on someone.</p>
<p>And perhaps there is a very good reason posters took JHS at face value, just as there is a very good reason that some attempt to spin it into something else. Quite amusing really.</p>
<p>IP … I’m going to make one stab at this and disappear.</p>
<p>What ECs should ANY kid do … things they find interesting and are drawn to … however the catch is that EC may not help their college application as much as other choices might have. With our kids we tell them to be themselves and the college thing will work itself out. </p>
<p>In this thread and the other one you complained about the advice of telling kids to do what they want and that top colleges may not appreciate those ECs as much as others. Well that true in almost all situaions … we can choose to go our own way or be more pragmatic about our choices … for our kids we tell them to be themsleves and with 3000 colleges and 100+ excellent ones the college thing will work out; we tell our kids their ECs are not to build a college resume they are so they will be involved, and to discover your interests in life. </p>
<p>You’ve also complained about the bias against Asian STEM violin playing applicants … and do not buy the response it is not bias but the desire to fill a class with a variety of types of students … schools see a ton of violin playing math kids; it’s hard to stand out in that pile. They also see a ton of upper-middle class suburban high soccer players (or other varisty athlete as a main EC) and it’s pretty hard to stand out in this crowd also (which is probably disproportionately white).</p>
<p>You’ve also complained about schools looking for leadership (and how can everyone be leader if no one follows) … when HYPSM are looking for both individual contribution types and leaders … and they combined are looking for 5000 freshman from a pool of a zillion seniors so there should be some of everything for which they are looking in the zillion seniors. I’ve interviewed for my school and been very impressed with the quality of the applicants; clearly 80+% of them are qualified and would do fine at the school. That said each year there were 1 or 2 kids that absolutely blew my mind when I met them … they may have been a leader or an individual contributor type; they may have been STEM person or a liberal arts person … and all these folks were admitted except one (whose academics were just too weak) with a 90+% admit rate … so in my experience the adcoms are able to cull out the true stars from the pile (if i had to guess they had killer recommendations).</p>
<p>Back in my day I overperformed in my admissions compared to my stats … and I certainly do not know why the adcoms let me in but I have a pretty good guess. My cross-country & track coach, who was also the vice-principal, wrote one of my recommendations and I know what he wrote about my tenure as a captain of the cross country and track teams … I was a STEM kid who was socially young, painfully shy, and very introverted however given responsibility for this community in my own way I did some good stuff. Stuff that I know see would probably look pretty good to an admissions folks … and the things that drove me then as a 17-18 year old still drive a lot of my behavior now in very similar ways … it’s my own form of leadership and it’s always been there.</p>
<p>OK, IP it will be two posts and then I’ve go. I have some hypotheticals. You are now the director of Admissions at one of HYPSM … and have implemented the perfect measurement system to quantify all ECs. I have some application scenarios for you.</p>
<p>Choice #1:
One candidate is a STEM type who is an excellent state level violinist. The second candidate is literally identical but has taken their interest in the violin further by tutoring younger player and setting up a program to loan violins to poor kids interested in taking up the violin. Who would you take? </p>
<p>I think that one obvious so let’s make it more interesting …</p>
<p>Choice #2
One candidate is a STEM type who is an excellent state level violinist. The second candidate is almost identical (everything other than violin activity is idential) their violin playing is excellent but not state level but they have taken their interest in the violin further by tutoring younger player and setting up a program to loan violins to poor kids interested in taking up the violin … interestingly in your perfect measurement system the lower level of playing and additional activities exactly cancel themselves out (they have the exact same application score). Who would you take?</p>
<p>OK, let’s make it more interesting.</p>
<p>Choice #3
You have 501 applicants with the exact same application score and only 10 openings … 500 of them are the all-state violin players and one is the lesser violin player but with the other violin activities. Remember, they all have the exact same application score … would you randomly select among the 501? Or would you select for variety among your students?</p>
<p>3togo, you should have added that your university has already accepted two or three violinists with far MORE than “all-state” credentials. Look, for example, at the achievements of Stefan Jackiw, Joseph Lin, and of course Yo-Yo Ma at the time each was admitted to Harvard. None of the 10 people selected from your pool of violinist candidates will ever be in the running for best, or even fifth-best, violinist on campus.</p>
<p>Oh lets mix it up a bit more. Lets add in another applicant, a URM, who was the recipient of one of those violins when he was a kid growing up in the 'hood. He took a real liking to the violin, was able to join a youth orchestra for the underpriviledged, and did quite well in school, although doesn’t have the stats of the above applicants. Lets give him a 2000 SAT and a 3.65 weighted GPA. Oh, and he volunteered at a concert hall taking tickets and helping to clean up. He’s a strong violinist but hasn’t had the opportunity for the private lessons that others have, so he isn’t quite as accomplished. What about his application? Oh, and he’s a full need student.</p>
<p>Then we can add yet another student. He started off on the violin, but then wandered over to playing the bass. He made states two years running. (Much easier as a bassist than violinist - a calculated decision on the part of his parents when he was in middle school BTW! But it’s not like he minded.) He doesn’t just play in the orchestra, but he also plays in the jazz band. And on weekends he plays bass guitar in a rock band for which he writes the music. He’s been in a number of school musicals too, though not as a star. He’s got great grades, great scores, graduates in the top 1% of his class. Do you take him?</p>
<p>Hint: IRL both Harvard and Yale did. He was a legacy at one not at the other. :)</p>
<p>After reading through this thread, it seems to me that OP simply wants to hammer home his point without truly considering anything else. Why ask the original question when you actually don’t care to hear any answers?</p>
<p>Your children certainly can do whatever EC’s they want and avoid community service. Their love for these EC’s may shine in their essays and set them apart. However, as MANY on this thread have commented, most elite American universities look to build a balanced class of individuals. They could certainly fill their classes with qualified students who have the same set of EC’s, but why would they?? Who would benefit from this? After all, most elite universities are not simply STEM centers. You need all majors, interests, and skills. </p>
<p>You can argue against packaging an application, sure. However, if you don’t agree with such a thing, you can avoid it. Don’t apply to that university/college. There are so many great places to study and you can find one that fits your goals/skills.</p>
<p>Wait wait…how about a violinist who switches to oboe…or bassoon…and wins national competitions on the oboe or bassoon. I would think THAT would trump those violins…assuming the school NEEDs these instruments for their orchestra.</p>
<p>What if the question is really, “What ECs should an Asian parent encourage his kid to do if the ultimate goal is admission to Harvard?” Then it seems to me that the answer is that the parent should encourage ECs that the kid will want to do, and that he will be very, very good at. So it can be violin–but he’d better have the talent to go on From the Top or win major prizes–if he wants it to help him get into Harvard. If it’s an EC that’s more unusual, he may not have to excel as much–the top tuba player in the US may not be as accomplished a musician as a bunch of violinists, for example.
So, yeah, if you’re talking strategy, piano, violin, and tennis are not the best ECs for Asians, because there are so many Asians doing them. Let me also emphasize that excelling in an EC is not the same as how hard you work at it. Harvard doesn’t care how many hours you spend practicing the violin–if you are only a third violin in all-county, Harvard isn’t impressed. The other kid was first chair in all-state. Ditto for tennis–if you’re not good enough to play for Harvard, they don’t much care.</p>
<p>What ECs, or curriculum for that matter, should ANY parent encourage his or her child to pursue? The ones that help the child discover who he or she is, and succeed at being him- or herself, and feel comfortable and happy, and have something to contribute to society. </p>
<p>That’s it. There is no other interesting thing to know. If, doing that, the child gets into Harvard, great. He or she will be the kind of student Harvard wants, and one hopes he or she will be in a good position to get maximum benefit out of Harvard. If, doing that, the child does not get into Harvard, great. The child will be a happy, successful, productive person. Who needs Harvard?</p>
<p>I love HYPS – I have just oodles of respect for them. But if I were making a wish for my kids, it would be that they will be happy, successful, and productive, not that they will have a hoodie with this or that logo on it.</p>
<p>You only get one shot at an education, and everything should be directed towards a meaningful, substantive goal. Which doesn’t include getting into any specific college, no matter how admirable it is.</p>
<p>And, by the way, I think we should note that white kids who rely on tennis, piano, and/or violin to round themselves out face exactly the same problem as Asian kids. I honestly don’t believe anyone ever says, “We’ve admitted too many Asian violinists.” I do believe people sometimes say, “If I have to read about another all-state first violin, her passion for Bach and Mozart, and how dedicated she is, I swear I am going to barf.”</p>
<p>^Which is why my younger son didn’t write a word about playing the violin even though it was the EC that ate up the most of his time. (Not that he was all-state either.)</p>
<p>this has morphed significantly since I last posted…</p>
<p>Honestly, as an Asian who lost most of the gym tennis games when it was required in HS, still struggles w/ math, and played the piano for about 2 months, I’m STILL seeing some distinct biases on this thread against IndianParent.</p>
<p>Seriously, it’s either common knowledge or urban myth that doing “typically Asian” EC’s is the kiss of death for a top college. Is this true? Questionable. But if someone wants to probe the mind of a community to see IF it is(nowhere did IP CLAIM it was true, they were asking a QUESTION) there’s NO need for this much backlash. </p>
<p>One can try to justify that Asian kids engaged in such activities may be pushed by their parents (though no one raises an eyebrow if said kid is volunteering. YES WE DO VOLUNTEER! We’re not heartless robots intent on getting that Harvard diploma…) but the truth is more that after reading about Asian kids who do math, play violin/piano, and also Tennis one after another, they start to blend together. If this is your passion, than you should be able to find a more unique way of demonstrating it than just listing it as practice hours and awards. Teaching others can work, though HS has weird dynamics sometimes so teaching a peer may not be “acceptable” there are other options as well, go play at a local senior center, volunteer to perform at a charity benefit concert, etc. </p>
<p>In the end IP even has it right, kids should be pushed to pursue what they love. Now that everyone gets that, can we stop pummeling him/her?</p>
<p>Read your own conclusion … a few times. And then ask you a few questions? </p>
<p>Should kids be PUSHED to pursue what they love? Should everyone gets “your that” especially when it is hardly true? </p>
<p>Kids should be encouraged to find their own passions and be supported along the way by positive reinforcement. “Pushing” is the domain of Amy Chua, and the hordes of misguided striped parents who have visions of HYPS grandeur. </p>
<p>And, fwiw, pummeling is not the exact word. Trying to help him see the light at the end of a dark and narrow tunnel is far more accurate.</p>
<p>ok, major distortment here. Who pays for the expensive lessons? Who drives the kid to said lessons? Who pays for the equipment used? You think any of this happens without a parent? What kind of dedicated teacher are we talking about here? And yes, pushing happens, kids get tired, kids get discouraged, and those same kids end up with major regret 5-10 years down the road if they quit because of that moment of despair. It’s easy for an outsider to say, “Well, if it meant that much to you, you would’ve/should’ve kept it up then…” but the person who actually matters is the one who AT THE TIME says, “I’m not going to quit, you’re going to try again.” It doesn’t matter which trusted adult/mentor figure it comes from. I don’t understand where my statement is false. Do you belive this isn’t IP’s point of view? Or do you find something wrong with my conclusion? If so, I’d like a more detailed reason for why. But I’ve digressed.</p>
<p>The point is, IP, judging by his/her posts, doesn’t seem to be advocating pushing your kids to do something they don’t enjoy. They want to ensure that their own kids aren’t going to be disadvantaged by doing what they DO enjoy. Any parent should be able to relate to that. Speaking of which, what light at the end of the long tunnel are you referring to? Force Asian kids to volunteer bc otherwise none of them would? (bc clearly, all Asian kids are born into upper middle class, none of them have to work a job to help support their family, none of them may be (gasp) RECEIVING charity from others…)</p>
(Not that he was all-state either.)</p>